How Do You Like Identifying Magic Items to Work?

[Morrus]

I think, for me, while certainly the element of mysterious magic is appealing, I find it's not fun for anyone but the DM in a game. It's great in a novel. And maybe once a year with a really important artifact in a game, but focring players to basically go throuh a rigmoarole of accounting and identification just so they can get on with the plot isn't really what they want to do.

You mileage may vary, of course. Everyone is different. Lik folks above, I've been through phases in my life of trying to structure magic into themed paths, forcing them to endure the whole "every magic item is msyerious and special" thing, done the gritty thing, created uber-detailed combat rules, insisted on encumbrance, rations and weather, and so on...

But after all those years I realised that accounting wasn't what we found fun; heroic fantasy is what we enjoyed. And there were plenty of gritty simulaitonist game sout there if that's what we wanted. So I figured - D&D is heroic fantasy, let's just play it as that. And I swear I've enjoyed it ten times more since (and found it ten times easier!)

I guess if you were to apply a lebel to me, over the last 20 years I've gone from a "simulationist" to a "gamist" to a "this is a social occasion with my friends - how do I ensure everyone is having fun?"-ist. I don't pretend that that's everyone's tastes though.

 

[Stalker0]

I like the 4e way of identifying magic items...except for special cases in which I might require unusual ways (rituals, a special sage etc) to identify.

 

[Jack7]

I once had a 20th level Eladrin Rogue Thunderclapper tell me that his 12th level Dragonborn Warlock Short Order Pastry Cook smelled like chicken to him. Well, chicken dipped in honey mustard. So I guess it's true what they say. Everybody smells like chicken to somebody.

 

[Lanefan]

At low levels, I make them field-test or Identify pretty much everything. As levels advance, so does assumed knowledge of basic magic items - and of the various normal field-test methods - but only to a point. I still use the pearl of value at least 100 g.p.; Identify is not foolproof, and it *always* triggers curses. (one of the most treasured magic items in my last campaign was a longsword +2 that gave Identify once a week by simply touching the item to be tested; it didn't trigger curses and was always accurate. The party would not let that sword out of their castle for fear it might come to harm!)

And it's not just fun for DMs. A long time ago, playing in character as Lanefan the Fighter, I got so involved in coming up with new ways of field-testing magic items that I ended up writing a guide on the subject. I'll have to post it here sometime.

Lan-"for Lightning Resist: field testing not recommended"-efan

 

[Connorsrpg]

Arcana checks.

 

[Mr. Wilson]

Usually handwave for mundane + whatever arms, armor, cloaks, and the like. Arcane/spellcraft check for the others.

Also houseruled identify in 3.X down to 1 1g pearl and 1 minute of research. No need to derail the game in order to figure out what the shiny new boots do.

 

[Holy Bovine]

I allow an Arcana check as soon as an item is picked up the DC to identify is 20+item level. Otherwise after a short rest the PCs know what the item is. I instituted the Arcana check on the off chance that a PC might pick up a magic item during combat to give them a chance to use said item right away.

 

[vagabundo]

I like that a trained Arcana user can detect magic and I.D. items now.

However, if it is an unusual item it becomes a story hook...

 

[Nebten]

I typically give them the +1 weapons and +1 armors with a Detect Magic since that is what they are going to start out with. Anything more then that, it will require some form of identification. It gets interesting with the heroes have multiple things to ID but they only have 2 pearls to use on this current trip into the mountians . . .